Re: Incorrect allocation handling for cryptohash functions with OpenSSL
Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
From: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2020-12-18T09:35:14Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
- cryptohash-leaks.patch (text/x-patch) patch
On 18/12/2020 09:35, Michael Paquier wrote: > Hi all, > > As of the work done in 87ae9691, I have played with error injections > in the code paths using this code, but forgot to count for cases where > cascading resowner cleanups are involved. Like other resources (JIT, > DSM, etc.), this requires an allocation in TopMemoryContext to make > sure that nothing gets forgotten or cleaned up on the way until the > resowner that did the cryptohash allocation is handled. > > Attached is a small extension I have played with by doing some error > injections, and a patch. If there are no objections, I would like to > commit this fix. pg_cryptohash_create() is now susceptible to leaking memory in TopMemoryContext, if the allocations fail. I think the attached should fix it (but I haven't tested it at all). BTW, looking at pg_cryptohash_ctx and pg_cryptohash_state, why do we need two structs? They're both allocated and controlled by the cryptohash implementation. It would seem simpler to have just one. - Heikki
Commits
-
Fix and simplify some code related to cryptohashes
- 15b824da97af 14.0 landed
-
Fix allocation logic of cryptohash context data with OpenSSL
- 55fe26a4b580 14.0 landed